Wilson Got His Wish in Remap Plan : Politics: Even so, Republicans may have a hard time wresting control of the Legislature from the Democrats.

Gov. Pete Wilson has within his reach what he has wanted desperately since he was elected a year ago: a new political map for California that gives his Republican Party a solid chance to take control of one or both houses of the Legislature.

But as the glow from this week’s release of new boundaries drawn by a state Supreme Court panel fades into the realities of the 1992 election season, Wilson may find that wresting control of the Legislature from the Democrats is not as easy as a lot of the experts are predicting.

The conventional wisdom in California political circles seems to be that Wilson was a genius for forcing the redistricting issue into the courts and that Democratic Assembly Speaker Willie Brown of San Francisco should have bartered with the Republicans for a better deal than his party is getting from the courts.

“They both rolled the dice,” said Alan Heslop, a Republican redistricting expert at the Rose Institute of State and Local Government. “It seems to me the governor won and won pretty big. Willie Brown lost and may have lost in a decisive fashion and a rather permanent fashion.”

Indeed, the plan includes several more seats that appear safe for the Republicans than exist today. In the Assembly, for instance, the plan creates 42 districts in which the Republican registration exceeds 40%, a rough standard often used to define a district that should go in the GOP column. The current lines, drawn by Democrats in 1982, have just 33 such districts.

But it is not clear that Brown had much choice. By most accounts, Wilson, who had the power to veto the Legislature’s redistricting plans and exercised that power three times, insisted in private negotiations on a map that would have all but guaranteed Republican control of the Assembly.

The districts drawn for the Supreme Court are far better for the Republicans than the current lines. And for that reason, there seems little prospect that at least seven GOP lawmakers will strike a deal with Speaker Brown to adopt an alternative plan, over Wilson’s objection, that protects incumbents of both parties.

But these lines, which the high court is expected to adopt Jan. 28 if the Legislature does not act before then, still leave significant doubt about which party will be in control. The pressure is on Wilson to produce a majority to match his rhetoric--a task easier said than done.

“The Republicans’ problem is like that of the dog that chases the car,” said Anthony Quinn, a redistricting expert and former legislative aide. “What do they do with it once they’ve caught it?”

What Wilson intends to do is recruit Republican candidates, raise scads of money and coordinate a statewide campaign around a central theme intended to persuade voters that it is time to dump the Democrats who have controlled both houses of the Legislature for all but two of the last 30 years.

To win the Assembly, the Republicans will have to add at least eight seats to their current total of 33. In the state Senate, they will need eight more on top of their current 13. And that assumes they don’t lose any of the seats they hold.

In the Assembly, however, at least three Republican seats are in danger of falling to the Democrats. If William Filante of Greenbrae runs for an open seat in Congress, his Marin County district almost certainly would go to a Democrat. Bev Hansen of Santa Rosa is faced with a district far more difficult for a Republican to win than the one in which she was elected in 1990. Dean Andal of Stockton, a freshman elected last year in a Democratic-leaning district, would see the number of Democrats in his district climb a little bit.

And in the Senate, veteran Republican Robert G. Beverly of Manhattan Beach, if he wants to remain in office, would probably have to move and run in a seat that stretches from Long Beach to Downey--far from his South Bay base. He might have to face Democratic Assemblyman Dave Elder, whose longtime ties to Long Beach would make him a formidable opponent.

On top of that, old definitions of safe Republican seats may not hold in the 1990s. The assumption has been that Democrats needed at least 55% of the registered voters in a district to be comfortable. But as Democratic rolls have thinned statewide over the years, those left in the party seem to be more loyal and more reliable.

As a result, many districts that the experts count as safely Republican or leaning toward being Republican may in fact still be competitive for Democrats.

The newly configured west Los Angeles County Assembly district that includes the home of Democrat Tom Hayden of Santa Monica is a good example. Its voters are 49% Democratic and 40% Republican, and it stretches into territory in and around Woodland Hills that would be hostile to a liberal such as Hayden.

But according to Hayden, the district’s voters sided with Michael Dukakis over George Bush in 1988 and with Democrat Dianne Feinstein over Wilson in 1990.

“That is one that is considered up for grabs,” Hayden said. “Certainly it will be contested by the Republicans. But it should be winnable (for a Democrat.)”

Similar districts can be found around the state--on the coast in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, in a heavily Latino area of Orange County, in Riverside County.

The key to these elections, Republican and Democratic partisans say, will be the message delivered by the candidates.

“A 40% Republican district can elect a Democrat just as easily as a Republican,” said Marty Wilson, a Republican consultant who is close to the governor. “If we don’t have the candidates with the right message and the right fit for the district, we’ll lose the seat.”

Recent history, Democrats say, shows that their party has fielded the more polished candidates with a message that connected with voters. They intend to do it again in 1992.

“I think the 1992 elections without a doubt are going to be the most frenzied elections for the Assembly in modern California history,” said Democrat Sam Farr of Carmel. “The Republicans have a shot at it but I don’t think it’s as strong as they think it is.”

Hayden added: “This is a Republican triumph if you define triumph as making the Democrats really sweat and work to hold on by their fingernails to a majority. Before it was a safe majority. Now it’s an unsafe majority.”

The Bottom Line

Here is how some key legislators fare in latest redistricting plan:

LEGISLATORS ENDANGERED BY PLAN

Senate Leader David A. Roberti (D-Los Angeles)

Background: Democrat and 20-year veteran of Senate.

His district is divided three ways. Roberti is dumped in with either veteran Sen. Newton Russell (R-Glendale) or, if he moves to the Westside, liberal Democratic Sen. Herschel Rosenthal of Los Angeles. He could run for an open San Fernando Valley seat.

Assemblyman Richard Floyd (D-Carson)

Background: Elected in 1980, chairman of Governmental Organization Committee.

Floyd is a champion of the blue-collar Democrats, but his district has been stripped of all but his hometown. “I’m going to run for reelection, I live in the district, it is still part of the area where I grew up, I know the people, and I’m going to win.”

Assemblyman Phil Isenberg (D-Sacramento)

Background: Nine-year Assembly veteran is the chairman of the Judiciary Committee and close to Assembly Speaker Willie Brown.

Isenberg and Assemblyman Lloyd Connelly (D-Sacramento) end up in the same district. “I plan to run for reelection,” Isenberg says, “maybe against Lloyd. No, I am not too happy with that.”

Assemblyman Burt Margolin (D-Los Angeles)

Background: First elected in 1982, chairman of the Insurance Committee.

May end up with no Assembly seat to return to or congressional seat to run for. He says both options remain open.

Assemblyman Tom Hayden (D-Santa Monica)

Background: ‘60s radical, first elected in 1982, chairman of the Higher Education Committee.

Vows he won’t be forced out, even though his liberal district has been carved up.

Sen. Robert Presley (D-Riverside)

Background: In the Senate since 1974. Chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

Suffers substantial loss of Democratic voters. Says he’ll run again in 1994 but concedes, “I will have to campaign harder.”

LEGISLATORS NOT ENDANGERED BY PLAN

Sen. Ken Maddy (R-Fresno)

Background: The moderate Senate Republican leader served in the Assembly from 1970-78, elected to the Senate in 1979.

He has emerged with a district whose GOP representation would be greatly improved. With two residences, Maddy also has option of campaigning for reelection in a nearby Democratic district.

Assembly Speaker Willie Brown (D-San Francisco)

Background: Legislator for 27 years and Speaker for 11.

Noting both he and fellow Democrat John Burton wind up in the same district, Brown adds: “One or the other of us will have to move, but you can’t screw me or Burton in San Francisco, even if you wanted to. We can win citywide. Either one of us can and will.”

Assemblyman Bill Jones (R-Fresno)

Background: Rancher, businessman and legislator since 1982, became the GOP leader earlier this year.

Both Jones and Assemblyman Bruce Bronzan (D-Fresno) could be in the same district, but Bronzan says he plans to move. “I’m not going to move,” Jones says, “I’m going to run where I live.”